Sometimes a brand has everything it “should.” Values are there. Mission is formulated. Identity is thought out. Brief is filled out. But the visuals still don’t work. And the problem is often not the quality of the images or that someone did a poor job. The problem is something else: too many abstractions and too few specifics. When we start building visuals around a philosophy, we talk about the general. But the buyer thinks about the specific. They don’t choose the brand as a whole. They choose a specific thing at a specific moment for a specific task. And that’s where the disconnect occurs. Visuals say “this is who we are.” But the person is looking for an answer to the question “why do I need this?” The same brand can sell a refrigerator, slippers, and a coffee maker. But the expectations from them are different. And the visuals must take this into account. Problems begin when all products start speaking the same language. The same tone. The same mood. Because “that’s our brand.” As a result, the visual becomes neat, logical, consistent—and completely unreadable. Sometimes the best question to ask before creating a visual is not “what are our values,” but “what should someone understand about this product in three seconds.” If there’s no answer to that, no philosophy will save it.
“Insights on AI Collaboration”
Who is actually responsible for how a brand looks in visuals?
